The second phase of the World Summit on Information Society or WSIS took place in Tunisia from November 13-18. It was reported that about 25,000 participants attended. WSIS was first held in Geneva (2003) and forms, with this recent second event in Tunis, part of a global UN-driven strategy to help developing countries realise the promise of the \’Information Society\’. The aim of WSIS was to enable developing nations to experiment and explore the potential of using ICT to spur their own development and growth.
Toronto in 1997 was host to the Global Knowledge Conference, the initial global ICT event advocating \’new\’ Information and Communication Technologies (i.e. Internet-driven). It gathered a \’summit-like confluence\’ of IT and communication-related (read as \’telecommunication\’) professionals to discuss \’development possibilities\’ in full appreciation of the future potential of multi-media convergence.
The Second Global Knowledge Conference (or GKII) was held in Kuala Lumpur in 2000. WSIS Geneva in 2003 was the first formal Summit where heads of states and official delegations met to discuss, identify and resolve common ICT issues related to developing nations. In Tunis this year two major issues were debated: (1) the nature, form and process of internet governance; and (2) the need for an improved framework for funding the ICT for development (ICT4D) agenda in developing countries.
In summary, WSIS Tunis was the culmination of a framework for a global ICT4D \’initiative\’ started in Toronto 1997; which matured into a global \’agenda\’ for ICT4D as a two-part summit – one in the \’developed\’ North (Geneva 2003) and the other in the \’developing\’ South (Tunis 2005). WSIS thus became the framework for the operationalisation of the UN\’s Digital Opportunities Task Force (or DOT Force) and all related issues and resolutions. What WSIS did was to successfully bring together the many related initiatives of ITU, Unesco, UNDP and the bilateral funding initiatives of many donors and players.
Single stall
My review is about Malaysia\’s role and presence at WSIS, as one of the foremost and key developing country players of both the GK and the ICT DOT Force initiatives in the context of our now world-famous MSC initiative. In Geneva 2003, Malaysia had one of the biggest country pavilions, based upon and entirely driven by the \’Malaysia Inc\’ concept, with a clear and defined leadership role provided by the (then) Telecommunications and Multimedia Ministry. At Tunis however, the Malaysian formal presence was reduced to a single stall, which was the private initiative of an ICT company whom, to their credit, boldly and proudly flew the Jalur Gemilang. In contrast, several other developing countries, even less wealthy and supposedly IT-savvy African nations such as Mozambique, put on their best shows in Tunis.
Both India and China showcased pavilions leaving no doubt of their prowess, might and strength in ICT – equally supported by both their private and public sectors. Even Dubai Internet City, an initiative originally modelled on the MSC and started years later, was well represented. Yet Malaysia, the MSC, and the Malaysia Inc were notably absent at Tunis 2005. This is particularly confusing given that no less than two Ministers and their formidable representative delegations actually attended the Summit.
Why this unacceptably dismal performance by Malaysia? After eight years of work in promoting the Malaysian ICT agenda, I am burdened to ask this question. Why was the Jalur Gemilang almost invisible at the biggest developing country ICT event in the world and yet we are now promoting the World ICT Conference to be held here in Kuala Lumpur in 2008?
Tunis was an ideal location and occasion to educate and relate to fellow developing countries our investment, position and role in ICT4D – an investment they all now have to make themselves. We must ask: \”What really is the Malaysia ICT agenda that we are trying to export to the rest of the world?\” Is the MSC, begun eight years ago, of any relevance to the developing world as an ICT initiative? Has Malaysia\’s strategic use of ICT in the development and growth of the k-economy and society a story worth telling? The notable and significant absence of the Malaysian pavilion was a major disappointment, particularly for Malaysian citizens who remain proud of both the mistakes and lessons learned by the MSC and the national ICT agenda.
But, alas, one now has to question if even Wisma Putra ever really understood and appreciated these initiatives. It is sadly clear that the entire strategic interest and focus on ICT became an operation of \’show-business\’ because today ICT in Malaysia has no agenda owner. Worse, that ICT has been simply reduced to an infrastructure without any meaningful content or community focus to drive our national development as originally intended. To his credit, the minister of telecommunications has raised this issue of the \’death of a strategic focus\’ of ICT in public before.
Let me offer my opinion on the matter. When the second national ICT council was convened, the (then) premier was advised that NGOs were as important a sector as the formal public and private sectors. Hence, the second NITC comprised all three sectors, with seven members each. The third council was also equally tri-sectoral. But, unfortunately, the current (fourth) NITC is wholly public sector with some token GLC representatives. This is a failure in design and construction.
But, was there any good news from Tunisia? Amazingly, it was a \’Malaysian registered pavilion\’ which was one of the biggest in Tunis – it was the booth of the Global Knowledge Partnership, a global NGO (I have written on the promise and potential of the GKP in an earlier column). The organisation is coincidentally registered in Kuala Lumpur and was therefore inadvertently identified by the organisers as being \’Malaysian\’ – albeit fortunate for Malaysia.
Unfortunate incident
Further the executive director of GKP is coincidentally a world-class Malaysian, a \’Nicol David\’ within the global ICT4D space, yet unrecognised as such domestically. Additionally, no less than 30 Malaysian speakers, moderators, paper presenters and actors kept the Jalur Gemilang flying in Tunis. Our entrance badges described our participation as being representatives of \’civil society\’. Malaysians \’incorporated\’ to fly the flag in Tunis included the likes of the CEO of Malaysiakini, Malaysia\’s lead blogger Jeff Ooi who came representing Harvard University and a notable young Malaysian professor who presented his paper at the Global ICT Conference, a parallel event organised by the World Economic Forum.
A number of Malaysians from this group won global awards – such as a the youth volunteer NGO doing work in Cambodia; and \’eHomemakers\’, a global portal for single mothers and related services originally funded by DAGs (the NITC\’s demonstrator Application Grants scheme, which has now been brought to an end in 2005). Where was the official representation in Tunis, and why did we not acknowledge these Malaysian individuals who made it under their own steam and merit?
Like the camera-shot of naked squats, the \’photo-shot\’ of this \’unfortunate incident\’ underlines my concern about the lack of integrity and coherence among the formal flag-carriers who were tasked with the official responsibility to fly the Jalur Gemilang in Tunis.
An investigation should be made by the as to why Malaysia only had a \’stall\’ at Tunis WSIS, which is an International Telecommmuncations Union driven event of global significance attracting the personal presence of the United Nations secretary-general and many heads of states?
